The curious case of governors across India

In the initial decades after Independence, Governors acted indiscreetly as an agent of the Union government. But it all changed with the Supreme Court’s famous Bommai verdict of 1994. Thereafter, the Indian system became more open, democratic, and federal.

However, with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) coming to power at the Centre with absolute majority in 2014, the governors started playing an overactive role yet again. In this regard, three Governors deserve special mentions: Jagdeep Dhankhar of West Bengal (now Vice-President of India), Arif Mohammad Khan of Kerala, and RN Ravi of Tamil Nadu.

But before coming to them, we must discuss West Bengal Governor CV Ananda Bose to understand to what extent the Governor’s post is being denigrated in public perception. While the three Governors mentioned earlier have been alleged to have furthered the Union government’s views on the states, Bose has attracted severe criticism from the BJP itself after hailing West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee as one who belongs to the ‘distinguished league’ of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, APJ Abdul Kalam, and Winston Churchill, thanks to her literary genius.

Well, so far even Trinamool Congress leaders, who continuously eulogise Didi (as Banerjee is referred to by her supporters), have not dared to go to this extent. Of course, Banerjee is a prolific writer, but it is highly debatable whether she may qualify as a classy writer. In fact, recently at a function, she was criticised by Abhijit Ganguly, a Calcutta High Court judge, for forcing the libraries to buy her ‘rubbish books’ to get government aid. It appeared like the Governor, who might not know Bengali and cannot read Banerjee’s original writings, was handing a rebuttal to the judge.

Bose has praised the Chief Minister on other occasions too, but those could be overlooked as they were on administrative matters. The rumour mills have it that Bose is appeasing Banerjee so that the Narendra Modi government may have a lifeline after the 2024 general elections in the event of the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) falling short of majority in the lower house of Parliament. We may discard that as part of a campaign by the Congress and the Left, but Bose’s comparison of Banerjee with Radhakrishnan is bewildering.

Whatever be the case, Bose has demeaned the dignity of the Governor’s post. His way of doing it though starkly differs from that of some other Governors. Bose’s predecessor in West Bengal, Dhankhar, clashed with the state government relentlessly, and used Twitter most of the time to air his sharp criticisms. It went to such an extent that in early 2022 Banerjee blocked him on Twitter accusing him of speaking in an unethical and abusive way.

Khan too is fighting a pitch battle with Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan for quite a few years now. Khan sent show cause notices to Vice-Chancellors of different universities when they refused to resign on his order, and went to the extent of appointing Sisa Thomas as V-C of APJ Abdul Kalam Technology University, bypassing the nominees of the state government.

Such actions raise questions of political propriety, especially because the Governor’s is not an elected post. Deductively, they must read out in the assembly a speech written by the government, which is a vision statement of the state government.

Recently, Ravi skipped certain parts of his speech in the Tamil Nadu assembly, including those sentences reflecting the current government’s political agenda, such as references to BR Ambedkar, EVR Periyar, the Dravidian model of governance, or the official language status for state languages.

If a Governor feels certain parts of their speech were forced upon them, their discretionary power under Article 163(2) allows them to voice a note of dissent outside the assembly on rare occasions. Otherwise, the Governor's executive task is limited to keeping a watch on whether the State is being run according to the provisions of the Constitution. If a Governor feels the State is going against the basic spirit of the Constitution, they can recommend imposition of the President's Rule which will then be under the lens of the judiciary. Going beyond this is abusive of the people’s will.

Neither sycophancy nor being an irritant fall within gubernatorial duties. Such acts demean the post; our ruling elite must understand it.

(Diptendra Raychaudhuri is a Kolkata-based journalist and author.)

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH.